Unpacking the Evidence on Human-Wildlife Conflict Interventions: The Case for Realist Synthesis

Abstract

Mitigating human-wildlife conflict often involves complex interventions acting in or on large, often messy, and even more complex social and ecological systems. The effectiveness of such interventions depends fundamentally on context, and evidence is often uneven, conflicting, or lacking. This paper aims to introduce realist synthesis, a theory-driven review method well suited to explaining not only which interventions work but also why, for whom, and in what circumstances. What follows is a worked example of taking a realist approach when evaluating and synthesizing evidence on virtual fencing applications in wildlife management and husbandry. Through explanatory analysis, I will help unpack how, under what circumstances, and for whom virtual fencing is likely to reduce human-wildlife conflict. In doing so, I’ll demonstrate how adopting a realist approach can support evidence-based decision making and practice by providing conservation practitioners with a rich and thorough understanding of interventions to lessen human-wildlife conflict and how they can be made more effective.